Segwit Reading Assignment

[SGG]

1. solution to increase size of blocks
2. took our signature and thus made it more secure while providing bigger block capacity within the same block size.
3. allowed for 2nd layer protocol
4. no

[jordanv]

1. the proposed alternative to segwit was to simply increase the block size.

2. On top of scaling Segwit solved the issue of transaction malleability.

3. Segwit allowed the intergration of layer 2 protocols such as the lightning network.

4. Are people forced to use Segwit, No as it is a soft fork

[Jack126]

1. Increasing the blocksize

2. The malleability problem. As the signature is not hashed the with tx-id this hash can’t be altered by slightly changing the signature…

3.The Lightning network functions on top of the the blockchain like a 2nd layer. A channel between 2 users is opened and transactions between the users can be made. Only once the channel is closed the transaction will be put on the blockchain. As there is less security (once the channel is open there will only be send a balance update back and forth) it’s mostly used for small payment. This is made possible by Segwit due to the fact the signatures are separated from the transactions and the malleabilty problem has been solved.

4.No this not nessecairy for. However adaption is at more than 80%.

[Pawel_Jez]

1. As an alternative solution, it was proposed to increase the block size.
2. Segwit solve transaction Maliability.
3. The Segwit adaptation enables the introduction of a Lightning network
4. No it is a soft fork so it is voluntary.

[Jorgevargas]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increase the block size limit

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   The malleability of the transactions issue

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Both work to boost Bitcoin’s transaction capacity, while Segwit increase the number of transactions that fit in a block, the lightning network acts as a second layer solution by taking frequent, small transactions off-chain.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   They are encouraged but they can decide not to do so as happened before with the fork of Bitcoin cash that decided to increase the blocksize from 1mB to 2mB.

[Nadia]

• What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increasing blocksize.

• What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

The security issue called Mallealability.

• How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Yes they are, Lightning network is possible because of Segwit.

• Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No one was forced, it was a softfork update.

[Elect43]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   To increase the block size

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Segwit solved the issue of transaction malleability.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit made the second layer solution available and the lightning network runs on it .

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, they can still utilize the old protocol.

[jimb]

1.larger block size
2.malleability
3.layer 2 solution
4.no

[Ivan_Eth]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   The alternative was to increase the block size limit from 1mB. This was not chosen because the community felt like this is kicking the can down the road.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   Transaction malleability - avoid people changing the transaction ID by changing only the signature and rehasing the transaction

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit allows the the development of lightning network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No

[Padma-Suta]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
a.) To increase the blocksize in order to fit in more transactions.
2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
b.) It solved the malleability, which was the first idea behind Segwit, which then turned into solving the scaling issue leading to lower fees without hard fork.
3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
c.) They connected through Segwit - taking the signature out of the unconfirmed transaction hash, which for example made it easy to build the lightning network and other second layer protocols on top. Example of the connection with Segwit and the lightning network, is to produce millions of transactions within the same time that the old bitcoin base program does (7-10).
4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
d.) No, it took a slow process for the system to adapt in 2017 and by 2019, still only 40% of bitcoin transactions been using Segwit (have not seen anything from the current percentage).

[Vanhait]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
To implement a larger block size.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
It solved a flaw in the code that allowed changing the transaction id (transaction malleability).

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
Segwit allowed for the development of second-layer protocols which is what the lightning network runs on.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No. It’s something they can choose to adopt. As of today it’s about 81% adoption across bitcoin. https://charts.woobull.com/bitcoin-segwit-adoption/

[Tom95]

1. Increasing the block size, like the hard fork Bitcoin Cash.
2. Transaction malleability, which requires the input signatures to be part of the txID hash.
3. Second layer solutions are more favorable with the use of SegWit.
4. No, the ‘‘old’’ way still works (soft fork), as not every wallet contains a SegWit option yet.

[Riske]

1 What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Allow bigger block size

2 What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Malleabillity // Manipulation of Signature of transactions and it allows to build Layer 2 Solutions with bundle transactions together

3 How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit is to base for building Layer 2 Solutions. The Lightning network allow two parties to setup a multisig wallet on the blockchain and process multiple transactions in ths wallet without affecting the blockchain each time (lesse secure, but faster and cheaper)

4 Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No

[MichaelGolpe]

1. Increasing Block Size was a proposed alternative.
2. It solved the issue of Transaction Malleability, permitted basic smart contracts and layer 2 solutions.
3. Lightning Network is one of the possibilities now possible due to SegWit.
4. Technically, no because it is a Soft Fork.

[Abdulgaf1803]

1. A proposed alternative to SegWit was an increase in block size which also lead to a hard fork, Bitcoin Cash.
2. SegWit solves the transaction malleability and lower fees along with supporting a second layer solution.
3. SegWit supports the second layer solution which is the lightning network.
4. No, it is a soft fork, however, wallets are adding SegWit support.

[Simo03]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
   Increase of the block size.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
   The transaction malleability problem.

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
   Segwit supporded the development of second layer protocols such as lightning network.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, however wallets are adding Segwit support.

[MichaelAudire]

1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was to increase block size.

2. Segwit solved the problem of transaction malleability.

3. Segwit makes features relying on unconfirmed transactions less risky and easier to design.

4. Segwit is a softfork, so no participants are forced to use it.

[IrishDevlin90]

1. A proposed alternative to SegWit is to increase the block size, this led to a hard fork Bitcoin Cash.
2. It solved the issue of transaction malleability.
3. Segwit made second Layer solutions possible through the lightning network.
4. No because wallets and other services are not forced to use SegWit because it is a soft fork.

[VitoGorbach]

1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

To increase the block size from 1 mb to 2 mb, though this would only have been a temporary solution, due to progressively increase in transaction volume.

2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Furthermore it solved the transaction malleability, saying it wasn´t possible anymore to pretend like a tx didn´t happen, because the digital signatures of the UTXOs aren´t stored in the block anymore and in result don´t help to form the hash of the tx (transaction ID)

3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit makes second layer protocols like the Lightning network possible and less riky, due to the malleability fix.

4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
   No, they can still make use of the old protocol, by reason of it being a soft fork.

[Brain_Ngorima]

1. Hard fork which was implemented as bitcoin cash.

2. Segwit solved for malleability

3. Segwit helped prepare the implementation of second layer protocols as lightning network.

4. Because it was a soft fork wallets are not forced to use it.